[arch-general] An old, tiresome discussion: cdrtools vs cdrkit

[Thomas Bächler]

Am 25.01.2010 17:15, schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> [ legal bla ]

It would be nice if you updated your homepage (which would need a new
look too, it reminds me of the old days when using the internet was
annoying due to those ugly blinking websites). Quote from
http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/linux-dist.html#legal:

"There is no license problem in the original cdrtools
	Sun lawyers made a full legal review on the cdrtools package between
August and November 2008 and did not find any license problem.

The claims from Eduard Bloch obviously conflict with the GPL license
text. See the GPL legal review from Lawrence Rosen an independent lawyer
who worked for the OpenSource initiative.

Read more about the background in a few days."

I would love to read more about this background. Unfortunately the "in a
few days" has been there for at least a year.


However, the real question here is: Even if there is a license problem,
will the original mkisofs copyright holders sue anyone over it? I pretty
much doubt that.
I don't pretend to understand any of this license crap anyway - it is
supposed to be free software, but it is making itself un-free due to
these braindead license discussions.

In any case, I would love to see cdrtools in Arch again, if we can just
get a definite independent answer on this whole mess (and I agree with
Allan here, you are biased on this matter).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20100125/e77a7768/attachment.bin>